Telegram-herald., 1887-07-31
WHY THEY OBJECT
ina vexEO geFFeRsoN-AvE. uNE.
II wiii Spoil oar osig Esoaiss.rd-sosas ~
tts Disadvantages Ihs Valuable
Franchises tks cay 10 Clsisx

A~4y.
In ths matter Of permitting the Street
Railway Company to construct . double
track out through JsAersOn-ass. and up
State snd Cherry SIS. 10 the LEks. } udee Bur
iing4tns has rendered Ell elaborate opinion.
and ofveEed cecrss sustaining the IA
junction already obtained. The COMPANY
propose 10 carry Tie matter 10 the cupfekae
Court. without. NE understand asking the
Common OsuRcil TO pass special ordinances
granting the permission which Jadge Bur
liagsms SAYS nust be obtained before they
can proceed The question has Swskeued
| much discussion pro and con. aue while,
IA general way the IELESkAN-t HkALO
and citizens generally believe Ia the build
ing Of street ca lines wherever they are
needed. vet the thoughtful citizen. when he
reflects, oarnOt bat find many r.asons Why
the proposed line should not Oe built
The Street Railway company have con-
tended that under their chsrier lhey are
! authorized, whenever resolution oi the
Council 80 directs. 10 80 into any sIfeei Oi
this clty and lay either single or double
track. The complsinants ln this case
through their attorney. Mr.. tnl, contend
that a special ordinance must be enacted
ia each instance specifying the particular
| streets ia which the consent IS gwen aud
prescribing the conditions under which Tie
company can construct.
Judge BurinEame Of The Superior Court
has, il his recent decision, held IL this
latter view. The question wish the public
now arises il the me needed OF course.
the property holders along the line OF the
road irsist that it is not and il was large
| majority of them VINO secured the inJunc~
ton. They bring very strong arguments
in support of their views, bat over and be-
yond the views OF tie property holders on
the line lies. OF course. the interests Of
the whole city. The Street Car
Company now occupy Dotn Lsgrave
! and South Division streets, TWO thorough
fares running parallel, 10 the 5 outhern out
| skirts Of the city. Jeferscn-aye. Is about
the only thOroughtare running in that d.
rection which is it TO drive on. II has
come TO De the driving street Of the city
| 1t is used BY all our citizens. not for racing
but as a boulevard, and il would seen % be-
8 shame TO unnecessarily destroy its beauty
! and usefulness in that direction. IL may
be urged that the new street car line only
goes up Jeiierson-aye. a little distance
To State-st but even then il
1t would be impossible TO get on - Jefer-
son ave. without driving up some street
that is already given up TO the street car
tracks. Jelferson-aye. was paved bat few
years ago. and it is now IN good condition
lt Is admitted indeed, the evidence taken
in the trial shows-that If the Street Rail-
way Company is allowed 10 90 on and con-
struct It's double tracks there they will use
up thirteen feet and five inches of the six
teen feet between the cutters, and Jelier-
sOn-aTe. will have 10 be repaired and new
cutters put IN al the expense of the prop.
erty holders along the line.
The grageled portion Of Cherry-st
is but twenty feet between the
CUTTERS outside the cutters is a grass plat in
which stand magnificent represent
ing a growth OF twenty-five years. The
most beautiful aud expensive residences
the pride OF our city-line the street, aud
driyeways leading from the street have been
constructed with reference TO the present
condition OF the street, the drive Eay oi
| which is ali too narrow These duveways
into private grounds Will ali have TO be re-
constructed, and the glass plats reaching
from the walk 10 the curb will have to bs
torn up and paved all at the
expense of property holders there.
Another thing brought ont at the trial of
this Injunction case should be taken into
consideration by people who are prone to
sign petitions asking the Council To pass
ordinances Of the character proposed. The
Vice President of the Grand Rapids Street
Railway Company stated under oath that
the franchises granted this company by the
city OF Grand Rapids stood upon the books
Of the concern a assets 10 the amount Of
100000.
Itisjust about time that the city stopped to
| think before granting any more such fran
chlses without dollars return.
Another telling point that many prOmi-
rent citizens who are opposing the present
line make against the company lies in the
fact tia. il once had a line no East Fulton
So 10 Jef-rson-ave and that il abandon Ell
Il and left the stree. in bad shape. The
Council afterwards ordered the street re-
paired from curb 70 curb With cedar blocks
This was done Of heavy expense 70 prop
erty holders along the line-at an expense
in two or three cases which
vas borne with great sacrifice.
The company now propose to tear up this
street and put in double tracks whereas.
had they KEEP, the old tracks there, they
would have been compelled TO bear large
portion OF the expense
The opponents 0i the new line declare
that j is not necessary go ruin the best
driveways We have n The city. aud they
poin go The fact that The city should take
warning from the Mary Laughlin case. in
which = Judgment for $500 costs has never
yet been collected. They Insist that the
company Is financially irresponsible.